Explanation and relations. How do general practitioners deal with patients with persistent medically unexplained symptoms: a focus group study

Contains fulltext : 80758.pdf (publisher's version ) (Open Access)BACKGROUND: Persistent presentation of medically unexplained symptoms (MUS) is troublesome for general practitioners (GPs) and causes pressure on the doctor-patient relationship. As a consequence, GPs face the problem of establishing an ongoing, preferably effective relationship with these patients. This study aims at exploring GPs' perceptions about explaining MUS to patients and about how relationships with these patients evolve over time in daily practice. METHODS: A qualitative approach, interviewing a purposive sample of twenty-two Dutch GPs within five focus groups. Data were analyzed according to the principles of constant comparative analysis. RESULTS: GPs recognise the importance of an adequate explanation of the diagnosis of MUS but often feel incapable of being able to explain it clearly to their patients. GPs therefore indicate that they try to reassure patients in non-specific ways, for example by telling patients that there is no disease, by using metaphors and by normalizing the symptoms. When patients keep returning with MUS, GPs report the importance of maintaining the doctor-patient relationship. GPs describe three different models to do this; mutual alliance characterized by ritual care (e.g. regular physical examination, regular doctor visits) with approval of the patient and the doctor, ambivalent alliance characterized by ritual care without approval of the doctor and non-alliance characterized by cutting off all reasons for encounter in which symptoms are not of somatic origin. CONCLUSION: GPs feel difficulties in explaining the symptoms. GPs report that, when patients keep presenting with MUS, they focus on maintaining the doctor-patient relationship by using ritual care. In this care they meticulously balance between maintaining a good doctor-patient relationship and the prevention of unintended consequences of unnecessary interventions

Is chronic pelvic pain a comfortable diagnosis for primary care practitioners: a qualitative study

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Chronic pelvic pain (CPP) has a prevalence similar to asthma and chronic back pain, but little is known about how general practitioners (GPs) and practice nurses manage women with this problem. A clearer understanding of current management is necessary to develop appropriate strategies, in keeping with current health care policy, for the supported self-management of patients with long term conditions. The aim of this study was to explore GPs' and practice nurses' understanding and perspectives on the management of chronic pelvic pain.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>Data were collected using semi-structured interviews with a purposive sample of 21 GPs and 20 practice nurses, in three primary care trusts in the North West of England. Data were analysed using the principles of Framework analysis.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Analysis suggests that women who present with CPP pose a challenge to GPs and practice nurses. CPP is not necessarily recognized as a diagnostic label and making the diagnosis was achieved only by exclusion. This contrasts with the relative acceptability of labels such as irritable bowel syndrome (IBS). GPs expressed elements of therapeutic nihilism about the condition. Despite practice nurses taking on increasing responsibilities for the management of patients with long term conditions, respondents did not feel that CPP was an area that they were comfortable in managing.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>The study demonstrates an educational/training need for both GPs and practice nurses. GPs described a number of skills and clinical competencies which could be harnessed to develop a more targeted management strategy. There is potential to develop facilitated self- management for use in this patient group, given that this approach has been successful in patients with similar conditions such as IBS.</p

Contesting the psychiatric framing of ME / CFS

ME/CFS is a medically contested illness and its understanding, framing and treatment has been the subject of heated debate. This paper examines why framing the condition as a psychiatric issue—what we refer to as ‘psychiatrisation’—has been so heavily contested by patients and activists. We argue that this contestation is not simply about stigmatising mental health conditions, as some have suggested, but relates to how people diagnosed with mental illness are treated in society, psychiatry and the law. We highlight the potentially harmful consequences of psychiatrisation which can lead to people’s experiential knowledge being discredited. This stems, in part, from a psychiatric-specific form of ‘epistemic injustice’ which can result in unhelpful, unwanted and forced treatments. This understanding helps explain why the psychiatrisation of ME/CFS has become the focus of such bitter debate and why psychiatry itself has become such a significant field of contention, for both ME/CFS patients and mental health service users/survivors. Notwithstanding important differences, both reject the way psychiatry denies patient explanations and understandings, and therefore share a collective struggle for justice and legitimation. Reasons why this shared struggle has not resulted in alliances between ME and mental health activists are noted

Attitudes towards fibromyalgia: A survey of Canadian chiropractic, naturopathic, physical therapy and occupational therapy students

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>The frequent use of chiropractic, naturopathic, and physical and occupational therapy by patients with fibromyalgia has been emphasized repeatedly, but little is known about the attitudes of these therapists towards this challenging condition.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We administered a cross-sectional survey to 385 senior Canadian chiropractic, naturopathic, physical and occupational therapy students in their final year of studies, that inquired about attitudes towards the diagnosis and management of fibromyalgia.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>336 students completed the survey (response rate 87%). While they disagreed about the etiology (primarily psychological 28%, physiological 23%, psychological and physiological 15%, unsure 34%), the majority (58%) reported that fibromyalgia was difficult to manage. Respondants were also conflicted in whether treatment should prioritize symptom relief (65%) or functional gains (85%), with the majority (58%) wanting to do both. The majority of respondents (57%) agreed that there was effective treatment for fibromyalgia and that they possessed the required clinical skills to manage patients (55%).</p> <p>Chiropractic students were most skeptical in regards to fibromyalgia as a useful diagnostic entity, and most likely to endorse a psychological etiology. In our regression model, only training in naturopathic medicine (unstandardized regression coefficient = 0.33; 95% confidence interval = 0.11 to 0.56) and the belief that effective therapies existed (unstandardized regression coefficient = 0.42; 95% confidence interval = 0.30 to 0.54) were associated with greater confidence in managing patients with fibromyalgia.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>The majority of senior Canadian chiropractic, naturopathic, physical and occupational therapy students, and in particular those with naturopathic training, believe that effective treatment for fibromyalgia exists and that they possess the clinical skillset to effectively manage this disorder. The majority place high priority on both symptom relief and functional gains when treating fibromyalgia.</p

Couples' experiences of interacting with outside others in Chronic Fatigue Syndrome: a qualitative study

Objectives Social isolation and stigma are frequently reported by patients with Chronic Fatigue Syndrome (CFS/ME) and relationships in the home environment with those close to the patients (their ‘significant others’) may thus be particularly important. Rather little attention has yet been paid to the beliefs and experiences of ‘significant others’ themselves in this context. This study sought to explore in-depth the beliefs and experiences of both patients and ‘significant others’ in relation to CFS/ME. Methods In-depth interviews using a semi-structured interview schedule designed around the core constructs of the Common-Sense Model of self-regulation (CSM) were conducted with two patients with CFS/ME and their spouses. Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA) was used to analyse interview data. Results Experiences of social interactions in relation to CFS/ME with others outside of the relationship dyad emerged as a key issue for all participants when reflecting on their experiences of living with the condition. These concerns are presented under two themes: interactions with healthcare professionals and interactions with the social world. Conclusions It is evident that significant others play an important role in the lived experience of CFS/ME. For both patients and significant others, the wider social world and interactions with outside others may be important influences on dyadic coping in CFS/ME. Both future research and treatment interventions could usefully include a ‘significant other’ perspective

Being in the Patient Position : Experiences of Health Care Among People With Irritable Bowel Syndrome

The purpose of this study was to gain in-depth understanding of what it is like for a person with irritable bowel syndrome to be in the patient position in encounters with health care providers. We conducted qualitative interviews with nine individuals. Our analysis, guided by interpretive description, revealed experiences of unsupportive and supportive encounters. Unsupportive encounters were shaped by humiliation, insignificance, and abandonment. Not feeling believed and acknowledged as persons made the participants lose trust in their own experience, which enhanced their unfamiliar mood of being in the world. Supportive encounters were less prominent. These were characterized by openness and acknowledgment of the patient’s lifeworld. Feeling significant and being listened to promoted feelings of being in a partnered, cocreating relationship. It is reasonable to assume that care originating in the patient’s lifeworld would support the patients to use their strength to manage illness and regain familiarity in everyday life